Ramage says...

@tha_mai it is not the contracts for ITM teams that hold the sway. People like Dagg, Guildford Hawkes Bay are contracted to Crusaders and Cruden and Smith Manawatu to the Chiefs and Highlanders those players plus many more would technically have to turn out for the Hurricanes. This is how it was at the start of Super Rugby but as players had to be moved to prop up the Highlanders it seems the local franchise has less call on the local players than before. Seems players are heading to a) where they can win a contract and b) who the coach is. If you are selected in NZ the pay is not that much different unless you win an All Black contract. So if it is money you are after you leave the NZ set up. Many do when they age and either no longer want to play International rugby or see the writing on the wall. Or as a younger player see that by moving overseas their chances of playing International rugby for some other country is enhanced or the pay is better.

Posted 10:11 02nd July 2012

tha_mai says...

not starting a civil war here . . . but why is Australia so different in terms of players franchise-hopping? Big money offers. Apart from the business with SBW, the relatively few franchise changes for 2012 were mainly as a result of the Hurricanes rejecting Hore, Nonu, Weepu. Cruden deciding to 'move on', but never any outright bidding wars between franchises.

Is it because they are also contracted to their ITM teams within that franchise area?

Maybe the Australian approach is more 'professional', but how do fans feel about supporting buy-in teams? Is NZ just behind in this approach to winning? Crusaders have gained more than their share of imports ever since Super rugby began, but because players wanted to go there, I don't thinks salaries are significantly different.

As they say . . ,debate and discuss (civilised please)

Posted 14:14 01st July 2012